Question 1

Can IPOR and FUSN in the migration arrangement be treated as the same token?

Accepted Answer

They should not be treated as identical. IPOR was the governance token used by the former IPOR DAO, which is transitioning to Fusion DAO. FUSN is the receiving token in the migration arrangement and its allocation is based on an IPOR holdings snapshot; that does not make their mechanisms or rights interchangeable.

Question 2

What FUSN ratio applies to IPOR holders in the migration arrangement?

Accepted Answer

The official arrangement uses a 1:1 ratio based on holdings that qualify in the snapshot: each IPOR counted in that snapshot corresponds to one FUSN. The snapshot covers IPOR and pwIPOR on Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Base, earned but unclaimed pwIPOR, and IPOR in specified vesting contracts; pwIPOR holders did not need to unstake. This is a migration-allocation rule, not an assurance that IPOR bought at any time can be exchanged immediately.

Question 3

Which holdings snapshot is used for the IPOR migration?

Accepted Answer

The snapshot was taken on May 9, 2025, at 02:14:59 PM UTC. Migration allocation is based on holdings at that point, so eligibility should distinguish the snapshot balance from balance changes made afterward.

Question 4

Does buying IPOR after the snapshot automatically qualify someone for this FUSN allocation?

Accepted Answer

No conclusion of eligibility follows solely from buying IPOR after the snapshot. The arrangement allocates FUSN from holdings in a specified historical snapshot, and a later purchase does not alter the balance already recorded in it. The official FAQ also describes withdrawal of protocol-owned liquidity from DEXs/CEXs and suspension of liquidity mining after the snapshot, calling IPOR effectively discontinued; this is a stated plan, not verification of current execution or price.

Question 5

How many IPOR tokens were minted initially?

Accepted Answer

100,000,000 IPOR tokens, or 100 million, were minted at inception. That is the initial minted amount and should not be treated as the market circulating amount at any particular time.

Question 6

Can IPOR be minted again after the initial issuance?

Accepted Answer

Under the IPOR token issuance design, the mint function is unavailable after the initial mint. Subsequent distribution or transfer of already existing tokens therefore should not be understood as newly minting IPOR.

Question 7

Does the IPOR contract include a token-burning method?

Accepted Answer

No. The official distribution model states that the IPOR contract has no burning method, so automatic burning or an ongoing supply reduction is not an embedded mechanism of this token.

Question 8

In the legacy IPOR governance system, was simply holding IPOR enough to vote?

Accepted Answer

No. Under the legacy rules, voting on DAO proposals required obtaining Power IPOR, rather than merely holding ordinary IPOR. This describes the legacy IPOR governance mechanism and does not establish the voting arrangement after the Fusion DAO transition.

Question 9

Could pwIPOR in the legacy mechanism be transferred like an ordinary token?

Accepted Answer

No. pwIPOR, the Power IPOR formed after staking, was non-transferable under that mechanism. It could be delegated, but delegation differs from transferring a token balance to another holder.

Question 10

What did delegating Power IPOR to a liquidity staking pool mean?

Accepted Answer

In the legacy liquidity-mining mechanism, delegation meant assigning part of a Power IPOR balance to a specified staking pool. It allocated the use of a balance within the non-transferable Power Token mechanism; it was not a transfer of those tokens to another holder. Official documentation says liquidity mining was discontinued in 2025 under IIP-35, so this describes a legacy mechanism only.

Question 11

In legacy liquidity mining, would doubling Power IPOR also double the power-up?

Accepted Answer

No. The mechanism uses a logarithmic relationship: increasing Power IPOR relative to liquidity does not produce a proportional increase in the power-up. The token increase multiple therefore cannot be used directly as the reward power-up multiple.

Question 12

Were IPOR tokens issued only to liquidity providers?

Accepted Answer

No. IPOR was issued to project participants including builders, investors, and liquidity providers. Liquidity providers were only one category, so the full issuance should not be characterized as rewards issued solely to liquidity providers.

IPOR (IPOR) Price

Price of IPOR (IPOR) Today in USD

Fear & Greed Index

About IPOR (IPOR)

Use Cases and Features

Supply and Issuance Mechanism

IPOR (IPOR) Basics & Market Insights

Fundamentals

Frequently Asked Questions About IPOR (IPOR)